Every White British Patriot knows that the whole of British nationalism is both stagnated and at its worst point in the last seventy years.

There is a preponderance of nationalist parties in the United Kingdom and they have two things in common:

They are minuscule in numbers from numbers in the few dozens when only ten years ago the British National Party numbered in the thousands

They will NEVER unite. Each is lead by either one person or a small clique of ‘leaders’ who are ego driven. Common sense and the fact that we, the so-called vanguard of the White Nationalist fight back in Britain which is in serious and possibly irreversible decline, is displaced by their own egos and the fact that they and they alone have the ‘right answer’.

That is why ‘Nationalist Unity’ in any sense is not only undesirable but actually impossible. The Egotists will always put their own interests and/or the interests of their ‘Movement’ in front of any sense of urgency. A sense of urgency that is calling out from every part of our beleaguered Nation that the time is coming when there will be NO White European Race any longer.
We are being bred out of existence and led down that path by a traitorous and truly evil gang that are determined to carry on with the agenda they have been chasing for two centuries or more – and that is the end of all individuality, both national and racial, to be overwhelmed instead by billions of faceless automatons, all of which are one universal colour and one universal race.
Above them will sit – in fact is already sitting – the power crazed Internationalists who are holding the levers of power and heralding in the darkness of the New World Order.

Unbelievably many of the leaders of these ‘parties’ are still falling over themselves to deny that they are racist, Fascist or Nazi – the political swearwords of the Liberal Left. Instead of saying yes in their beliefs they put their race first and if that makes them racists, fascists and Nazis then so let it be.

I can only see one possible last attempt at reforming White Nationalism into a meaningful political force that instead of pathetically denying in a moaning defeatist voice that they are not racists, but to go on the offensive and show what Racialism really is – the natural choice of putting your own people first – as Nature indeed intended, and throwing off all the stupid Globalist accusations.

Instead of a seemingly bunch of political cowards, the Enemy will see a far different opponent. A fierce and uncompromising opponent determined to win this final bitter struggle to secure the very existence of our White Race and a future for our future generations.

I am writing this not for the attention of those who cannot see beyond trying to get a meagre and shameful number of votes in a ridiculous ‘local election’. No my appeal is to the young White Nationalists who have shown over the past decade that they have the potential to make this last defiant fight into a reality.

I am also calling to all the veterans of the three or four generations who still believe in White Nationalism or National Socialism (call it what you will – it’s the same thing), to act as k the guides and leaders at every level to bring up this vast sea of potential recruits into a movement that can truly call itself a MOVEMENT!

They can ban us; arrest us or even try and kill us but they cannot kill the idea of a White Nationalist Revolution.

If this means forming or resurrecting a new White Nationalist Party with the will, the principles, the organisation and the vision to ensure that this time we win!

Eddy Morrison blogs at natsentinel.blogspot.co.uk and is editor of the White Voice e-newsletter: to subscribe email nationalfreedompress@gmail.com

Representatives of two now defunct nationalist parties – the British Peoples Party and the England First Party – lay wreaths at the War Memorial in Darwen, Lancashire, on Armistice Day 2006. Delegates included veteran nationalist Eddy Morrison (front row, far left) and then EFP councillors Mark Cotterill and Michael Johnson.

I’m reluctantly entering my 50th year as an active White Nationalist.

In 1978 when I was a National Front Organiser I firmly believed that we would have our first members of parliament by 1980.
We didn’t and the period known as the ‘horrible 80’s ” was upon us.

Split after split with eventually a by-election where one schism of the National Front stood a candidate at the same time as another schism of that splintered wreck of a once mighty Movement.

The 1990s got a bit more interesting and we achieved the election of a BNP candidate in London. Things were slow in the BNP but it was under John Tyndall going in the right direction. As BNP Yorkshire Organiser I was gladdened to see many old Comrades returning to the BNP.

Then in 1999 the British Nationalist equivalent of the Twin Towers occurred: Nick Griffin became the leader of the BNP.
He spent the next ten years building it up. BNP councillors were everywhere and two MEPS were elected.

Nick Griffin (second right) on BBC TV’s Question Time in 2009 with a panel including then Justice Secretary Jack Straw

Then came the second calamity! Griffin’s appearance on a major national TV show. Griffin acted like a buffoon. He even sidled up to the Black ‘celebrity’ who was sitting next to him. He bungled his way through a barrage of outrageous Lefty opposition and made no attempt either to push himself into prominence in a public forum watched live by millions or to say anything cohesive.

He acted like the local village idiot. (Was it an act?)

Now we find ourselves in the 2010s. A large number of Nationalist grouplets vying for members of an ever dwindling pool of recruits.

With the breakup of the EDL and the BNP one would have expected a huge rush to join an existing Nationalist Party. It never happened. The British Democratic Party seems to be totally static and the National Front is a shadow of a shadow of its former self. The less said about ‘Britain First’ and the lunatic New British Union the better!

Unity talks abound. Unity with whom and why Unity at all? It’s like putting all the hospital patients with transmittable diseases in a ward of basically healthy people.

Unity serves one purpose – it gives a platform for people who like to talk about Nationalist Unity to an audience of more or less the same people who like to hear about Nationalist Unity who can go on home and do little more than look forward to the next Unity meeting ad infinitum.

It’s never going to happen folks – believe me!

A march to the Home Office in 1972 by Smithfield meat porters protesting at the admission of more than 27,000 Asian immigrants from Uganda

We need, as we did in the 1960s a fresh start.

We need a White Nationalist movement that is no holds barred. We need one that rejects the inevitable compromises that come with Unity.

We need a Movement that rejects both internal and external democracy and runs on the meritocratic principle.

You join, you work hard and you get the benefits.

You join, you gripe about provocative tactics and you should for the good of all, rush off and join UKIP (if it’s still there of course).

A new Movement (I can feel the shuddering from here), it must be. And for the first few years of its life it should avoid elections like the plague.

It shouldn’t even be registered with the ZOG control apparatus called ‘The Electoral Commission’.

Give them your membership numbers; state of finances; sign forms that bind you to a Liberal Stalinist state and for what?

To get seven votes in a council election (Nick Walsh, Hull 2016)

A new Movement must be uncompromising in its White Nationalist principles and uncompromising in its tactics of confrontation and uncompromising in its drive for power.

50 years on from the creation of the National Front, veteran nationalist Eddy Morrison reports on the choice we now face

I am a founder member of the National Front, one of the few still active (my old Comrade, Andrew Brons was also a Founder member and is now the Chairman of the British Democratic Party).

I know of others, some ex-Union Movement such as Keith Thompson (League of St. George) and Colin Todd (Organiser of the Candour Organisation) to name but only two. I would say there are probably hundreds of White Nationalists from my generation of the 60’s and early 70’s who in some way are still fighting the good fight.

A month or so back I attended the funeral of Keith ‘Beefy ‘ Taylor, tragically dying in his early fifties, and was both astounded and encouraged to see over sixty White Nationalists also paying their respects. They came from many groups and no groups but they were unified for those few precious hours to say their farewells to a good and steady White Patriot, Beefy – also a long term member of the National Front.

One old Comrade asked me after the service ‘Did we all waste our time Eddy?’

My reply was this – NO we did not waste our time for we can say to our children and grandchildren that at least WE FOUGHT!

But reflecting back is it not a greater tragedy that it takes the death of a Comrade to give us total Nationalist Unity even for a few short hours?

I am reminded of the old Norse saying:
“Cattle die and kinsman die and one day you and I shall die. All that will remain is the fame of a dead man’s deeds”

So the fight goes on as it must. We have no real choice. It’s either victory or racial death. For us; for our children and for generations yet unborn.

Looking at the fractured British Nationalist scene I see a number of groups who, if United soon can form the nucleus of what must become a mass movement.

As White Nationalists I recognise the NF; the BDP; England First; British Movement; National Action and the various ‘Infidel’ style groups spread throughout the country. and the Alternative Right Forums which are doing great work and some elements of what’s left of the BNP.

Two organisations I would NOT add are the pro-Zionist Britain First Party and the ludicrous New British Union which has stated it is not a racial Nationalist Party and indeed I am led to believe that its prime member has condoned mixed race marriages.

Now you will be saying ‘Hang on but….” about some of the groups I have listed. That is the wrong way of thinking about the desperate need for British Nationalist Unity.

All old personality clashes, some dating back decades MUST come to an end for the greater good of the Cause itself.

I have to make a case for what a United Front should be – and I have to conclude it MUST be the National Front.

50 years ago this coming February, the NF was formed by disparate groups who patched up their differences and created the National Front.

I would argue then that there is no need for another name to be thrown into the barrel because the NF with its wide range of policies has something to offer all the varying shades of opinion across the British Nationalist Spectrum.

This is why we have seen so many others rise only to fall after a few years whilst the resilient NF soldiers on.

A.K. Chesterton, founding chairman of the National Front

2017 is a watershed year for our Movement. It marks in February our 50th Anniversary. This will take the form of the biggest indoor rally we can mount and this is an open invite for all these groups mentioned to be welcomed by the Front.

On strategy and tactics there is always room for manoeuvre and I believe that the NF’s policy of elections coupled with constant Street activity is a winning formula.

The Trump phenomenon in the USA; Brexit and the rise of the Alt Right across Europe and America is growing so strong that we can really call it the first real challenge to the Globalist Tyrants such as the Jewish George Soros and the evil of Hilary Clinton.

The victories of the Alt Right must be seen as a breakthrough against the Liberal Marxist Hegemony and behind the Alt Right there is us – the Racial Nationalists.

Let them open the door for such as we so that it gives us entry to go up against the World Enemy of old but this time with a real chance of victory.

Time is running out fast for our White Race so the choice is YOURS – Victory through Unity or White Racial Genocide.

For European nationalists, American politics traditionally seem alien in several respects, including the role of religion. Christianity (usually in its protestant, ‘fundamentalist’ variants) has been an essential ingredient of ‘right-wing’ political movements in the USA, whereas in most of Europe it was marginal (at best).

Donald Trump seems to have changed all that. During the Republican presidential primaries, it was obvious that he had little support among Christian fundamentalists, most of whom rallied behind Trump’s main rival, Ted Cruz. Similarly the main Jewish Republican powerbrokers, such as casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, whose financial clout has traditionally been allied to Protestant fundamentalists in promoting Republican presidential candidates since the Reagan era, have been lukewarm at best towards Trump.

As the critical phase of the campaign begins, with tonight’s first presidential debate, the so-called Christian Right is now (mostly) coming off the fence and declaring for Trump as the lesser of two evils, given that Hillary Clinton would be a nightmare candidate for traditional Christians on issues such as abortion and homosexual marriage.

One influential Christian Right leader, Russell Moore of the Southern Baptist Convention, remains hostile to Trump. Moreover there is now a clear divide within American Christianity: Catholic voters are heavily pro-Clinton according to latest polls. This is partly because of the large bloc of Hispanic Catholics, who are for obvious reasons likely to be especially hostile to Trump: but this cannot wholly explain the swing. Clearly Trump is also losing heavily among White Catholics.

Around one-quarter of the US electorate is Catholic, and in recent polls they have split 55-32 or 61-34 in favour of Clinton. When Mitt Romney lost to Barack Obama in 2012, he was only 50-48 behind among Catholics. In 2004 George W. Bush won the Catholic vote, as did his father in 1988.

Cardinal Keith O’Brien, leader of Scotland’s Catholics until his disgrace in a homosexual scandal, with former SNP leader Alex Salmond. Among the most significant changes in recent Scottish politics has seen many Scottish Catholics abandoning their traditional adherence to Labour.

In the UK, there has traditionally been a clear lead for Labour among Catholic voters, although one of the most interesting aspects of last year’s general election was that Scottish Catholics for the first time backed the Scottish National Party in large numbers. (The SNP was once seen as a Protestant party, but its former leader Alex Salmond assiduously cultivated the Catholic hierarchy.)

However in the UK the vast majority of voters are not genuine practitioners of any religion. Only 11% of Britons now claim that they attend some form of religious service at least once a month, though there are much larger numbers of nominal Christians.

In the most recent detailed survey of England and Wales, those openly admitting that they have “no religion” amounted to 48.5%: for the first time this is now the largest sub-group, ahead of all Christians combined, who amount to 43.8% (though most of these do not practice their religion in any meaningful sense). All non-Christian religions combined add up to just 7.7% of the UK population, though of course this is a growing minority, and most of these have more than a nominal attachment to their religion.

The sharpest declines are among practising Anglicans, once the bedrock of the Conservative Party, and the various (White) non-Anglican Protestant churches. Every undergraduate history student, for example, was once familiar with the argument that the origins of the Labour Party “owed more to Methodism than to Marx”, yet the House of Commons post-2015 now has not a single Methodist MP. The typical non-Anglican Protestant today is more likely to be an inner-city African than an English or Welsh chapel-goer.

The wedding of Theresa and Philip May at her father’s church in Oxfordshire. Mrs May’s father, the Rev. Hubert Brasier, stands second right with Mrs Brasier, by then confined to a wheelchair.

Giles Fraser – a left-wing but pro-Brexit Anglican vicar – has recently drawn attention to the religious background of Theresa May, newly appointed Prime Minister. It is well known that Mrs May is a vicar’s daughter. Less well known (as Fr. Fraser points out) is that her father was on the most extreme Anglo-Catholic wing of the Church of England. This carries politically incorrect implications that Fr. Fraser chooses not to discuss.

During Mrs May’s childhood her father – Fr. Hubert Brasier – was successively vicar of two countryside parishes near Oxford: St Kenelm, Enstone, from 1959 to 1970; and St Mary the Virgin, Wheatley, from 1970 until his death in 1981.

Now this really is a fascinating choice. First, because no one who wasn’t a proper churchgoer would ever have heard of it. And, second, because it betrays the enormous sacramental influence of her high church father. Benediction, the worship of the blessed sacrament – or “wafer worship” as Protestant scoffers often describe it – is pretty hardcore Anglo-Catholic stuff. That’s why she was named after a 500-year-old Catholic saint. As time goes on, this background is bound to shape her ministry – and yes, that’s how she will think of it.

During her Desert Island Discs interview, Mrs May recalled:

“a hymn which sometimes, if my father and mother and I were alone in the church, we would just kneel down and sing …’Therefore we before him Bending'”

There is a reason why this hymn would have been sung by the vicar’s family in the absence of the congregation: this particular hymn (known to Roman Catholics down the centuries as Tantum ergo) is theological and political dynamite! It is sung during a service formally known as ‘Benediction of (or with) the Blessed Sacrament’‘.

This service is seen by the more Protestant (‘low church’) end of the Church of England as illegal: earlier in the last century there would sometimes be legal action taken against Anglo-Catholic vicars by parishoners if Benediction was introduced into their church. Very likely this was the reason for Fr Brasier singing this service in private with his family. Certainly the current website of St Mary’s, Wheatley, does not suggest that it is today an exceptionally “high church” parish.

Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament – the service celebrated privately by Theresa May’s family during her childhood – was once seen as ‘illegal’ in the Church of England

Several decades later a wider issue is raised by the words of the Tantum ergo (written by the great scholar St Thomas Aquinas in the mid-13th century). Latin being a very precise language, there is no room here for modern liberal fudging: St Thomas writes that we venerate the blessed sacrament – the body and blood of Christ – as we celebrate the transition from the old covenant (between God and his ‘chosen people’, the Jews) to the new covenant (between God and Christians).

The English words of the hymn sung by Theresa May and her family are obscure, but the Latin original is clear: et antiquum documentum novo cedat ritui. The ancient document – the old covenant – gives way to the new rite, represented by the substance of Christ’s body and blood in the form (the ‘accidental’ appearance) of bread and wine.

Cedat is the important word here: the Latin verb cedere meaning to surrender, yield, or give way – as in English to cede territory after a war, to concede in an argument, or indeed to succeed – as Prime Minister May has succeeded David Cameron.

Modern, liberal Catholic spokesmen have sometimes argued that the old covenant with the Jews remains in force alongside the new covenant sealed by Christ’s death and resurrection. Ironically Fr. Brasier’s old parish at Enstone includes the village of Heythrop – which was the original base of Heythrop College, London University’s specialist theological college founded by the Jesuits. Modern tutors at Heythrop – such as former principal Brendan Callaghan – have been in the forefront of those arguing that the divine covenant with Jewry remains valid. Pope Francis recently insisted that the Church “recognises the irrevocability of the covenant and God’s constant and faithful love for Israel.” He added: “it is clear there is an inseparable bond between Christians and Jews.”

Yet if Prime Minister May truly believes the words of the hymn she sang as a child – the words she chose to take with her to the BBC’s putative desert island – she cannot believe this, any more than she could believe that David Cameron retains Prime Ministerial authority alongside her.

In April 2015 (as Home Secretary) Mrs May addressed Britain’s largest Zionist youth movement in a speech celebrating the 67th anniversary of Israel’s foundation, a catastrophe known to Palestinians as the Nakba.

Mrs May explicitly referred to commemorating Yom Hazikaron, the day on which “We remember the sacrifice of those who fought to achieve and protect that independence.”

This means most notably those Zionist terrorists who died fighting against British forces and Arab civilians during 1945-48, and includes those who were executed for atrocities such as the murder of Lord Moyne and his driver Lance Corporal Arthur Fuller.

How can an educated person at one and the same time believe in the words of St Thomas Aquinas in the Tantum ergo – the traditional teaching of the Christian church down the centuries – yet at the same time celebrate the creation of the State of Israel as a fulfilment of the old covenant with Jewry, which had – according to that Christian doctrine – been abrogated?

How can a British political leader publicly “remember the sacrifice” of Jewish, anti-British terrorists as though they were heroes?

Perhaps for an aspirant Prime Minister any heresy, any betrayal, any hypocrisy is conceivable for the sake of personal ambition.

How could anyone vote to leave the European Union now that we know that we will all be £4,300 a year better off by 2030 if we stay in? Except, of course, that we will all be better off anyway even if we leave, just by not quite as much! All of that is assuming that economic growth continues at a predictable rate until 2030. And in economics nothing is predictable. If the Treasury is trying to look ahead fourteen years to 2030, try instead to look back fourteen years to 2002 and ask yourself how many economists then predicted the crash of 2008 – answer, none.

It’s not just dodgy forecasts that we can pick up from the Treasury’s document. There are also all those little things which the Treasury chose to ignore or brush aside but which will have quite a significant, and positive, effect should we choose to leave. To mention a few of those positive things; freedom from regulation, freedom to trade with the rest of the world, freedom from having to pay millions of pounds in tribute to the EU every day, freedom from the colossal cost to our infrastructure (schools, housing, transport, NHS) of mass immigration.

With mass immigration I come to the issue which, I suspect, is the real concern of readers of Heritage and Destiny. It is beyond belief that the Chancellor of the Exchequer in a government which is pledged to reduce mass immigration to the tens of thousands, has predicated much of his strategy for economic growth on continuing mass immigration adding a further 3.3 million EU migrants to our population by 2030! This implies 235,000 EU migrants per annum and does not include those from outside the EU, nor births to all the newcomers and to those “Non White British” already living here.

Unlikely allies for Brexit: George Galloway and Nigel Farage

So here are some facts – not forecasts because the implications are obvious – of my own. Excluding the other countries of the United Kingdom whose populations are more or less stable and which attract little immigration, the population of England at the census of 2011 was 53 million of whom 42 million (80%) declared themselves to be White British. (It may be of interest to note that the population of England according to the census of 1951 was then 42 million, almost all White British). The 20% who are not White British have 35% of the children born annually in England, adding around 240,000 to their number every year. Annual net immigration, excluding British citizens returning to the UK after a spell abroad, is now running at 363000. So the total annual increase in the Non White British population is in the order of 600,000, a figure which can only go up as children are born to the future new arrivals. Given these figures it is easy to see how the Office for National Statistics has calculated that White British people will be a minority among under 18s by 2037, just 21 years from now.

Our national identity is being ground out of existence and Englishmen such as George Osborne and David Cameron are throwing the entire government machine into hastening the process. They must be thwarted.

Many nationalist blogs and forums would have you believe that Muslim voters exercise significant political power, forcing party leaders to curry favour with them at the expense of White voters.

But is this true? There is no doubt that the number of Muslim voters in Britain has increased dramatically in recent years, as children and grandchildren of the original Asian immigrant generations have grown up, and their numbers have been swelled by more recent arrivals from Africa. Also there is no doubt that Muslims tend to turn out to vote at elections, in much greater proportions than some other minority groups such as the (mainly Christian) Afro-Caribbeans.

Nevertheless to have real influence even in a very close contest such as next week’s general election, Muslims would need to have two extra factors on their side: they would have to be concentrated in potentially marginal seats, and it would have to be credible that they could switch between the major contending parties.

The truth is that neither of these factors apply. There are forty constituencies (out of the UK total 650) that are more than 15% Muslim, and of these only five are truly in the balance: two Lib Dem held seats being targeted by Labour (Birmingham Yardley and Bradford East), and most crucially three presently Conservative seats on Labour’s key target list (Pendle, Dewsbury and Ilford North). In the latter case the importance of the Jewish vote (6.5% – plus ethnic Jews who are listed on the census as ‘no religion’) partly counterbalances the Muslim vote (15.3%), and the odds are that pro-Israel Tory MP Lee Scott will survive. Meanwhile in Pendle and Dewsbury the influence of UKIP will probably combine with Muslims moving from Lib Dem to Labour, and produce Labour gains. In Bradford East the incumbent Lib Dem MP David Ward has desperately burnished his anti-Zionist credentials in a bid to avoid what seems sure defeat.

Of the rest 33 are safe Labour while one – Brent Central – is a certain Labour gain from the Lib Dems this year, and is such an ethnic and religious hotchpotch that its 21.2% Muslim population could never be seen as decisive anyway. Birmingham Hall Green was close in 2010 only because of the strong Respect campaign by local councillor Salma Yaqoob. With her retirement and the decline of Respect everywhere outside George Galloway’s Bradford, Hall Green is sure to be safe Labour this year.

That leaves just Bradford West – 51.3% Muslim and sensationally won by George Galloway in a 2012 by-election – where we really do see a contest that is all about the Muslim vote, though with many local peculiarites (in this case ‘local’ means Pakistani village politics transferred to Yorkshire). Galloway will almost certainly win, but this underlines the real truth that Muslim voters will have very little influence on the outcome of the 2015 General Election, and very little influence on the next government.

The Heritage and Destiny website today publishes a guest article by Ivan Winters, exploring some of the facts behind the shooting down of the airliner MH 17, widely blamed (indirectly) on Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Rather like my previous article re the Ukrainian protests and the overthrow of a democratically elected President (see H&D Issue 60) all I intend to do in this article is to provide a ‘primer’, a starting point for the reader to launch their own enquiries and lay to rest some of the more idiotic narratives going around. I made comments in the last article about the poor quality of Western media coverage of the situation during the ‘Maidan protests’ and the need to use alternative sources. It has got even worse during this incident. I cited Al Jazeera (AJ) and Russia Today (RT) as two useful sources in my previous article although I did caution that RT is of course putting the Russian regimes spin on things. RT coverage has deteriorated with the network putting forward various barely credible alleged versions of ‘events’ all of which conveniently blame the ‘Ukraine’ or ‘the West’. Most of these claims can be easily debunked by a little research. The next day forgetting the previous day’s narrative which has been debunked RT comes out with another version of events!! In fact at least one RT journalist, Sara Firth, resigned over RT’s handling of the issue. The only station that has remained credible is AJ but AJ has not been giving much airtime to the MH17 incident. This is because AJ’s ‘heroes’ in Gaza, Hamas, have been having a noisy neighbourhood spat with Israel and AJ is giving that a lot of airtime.

A further problem is that among the various claims and counterclaims made by both parties observers are effectively told by both sides that they must take everything ‘on trust’ with little of the primary evidence being made available. We went to war in Iraq on the basis of a ‘dodgy dossier’ now we are not even being allowed to see the dossier merely listen to each sides ‘interpretation’ of their alleged evidence. This includes the fact that the US is known to have electronic intelligence aircraft (ELINT) and satellites monitoring Eastern Ukraine. Both AJ and RT have shown pictures of State Department Press conferences in Washington where the spokeswoman has refused to give any primary evidence from these sources just ‘interpretation’. The evidence given has included such things as pictures from the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) allegedly showing a Russian SA-11 rocket launcher being transported on a civilian low loader and photographed allegedly passing through a town close to the Russian border, Krasnodon (Pic 1).

The photo has now been taken down from the SBU site but is still quoted by Western sources to prove Russian complicity in this incident. Why has it been taken down. Because some Western sources working on the Internet did what Western media failed to do – check out the pictures. Looking at Pic 1 despite the cruddy resolution clearly visible over the top of the low loader are some trolley bus wires and to the left is the edge of a large roadside advertising hoarding. The border town where this is alleged to have been photographed has a trolley bus system but nothing else fits the photo! In fact some detective work suggests this was taken some distance from the border on the outskirts of Luhansk (Pic 2).

Pic 2: Some detective work suggests the photo was taken elsewhere – some distance from the border on the outskirts of Luhansk.

Just too add to the disinformation the Russians used the same photo (Pic 1) and said it was taken in the city of Krasnoarmeysk a city controlled by the Ukrainian Army since May 11th . But Krasnoarmeysk has no trolley bus system. These discrepancies are analysed further here. A further light is thrown on the situation because as I mentioned above the missile launcher was being transported on a civilian low loader. If, as claimed by the Ukrainians this was a Russian supplied system that is rather odd as the Russians have a range of military tractor/trailer units to transport their systems on. Use of a civilian low loader suggests an ad hoc arrangement, the sort of thing that could well be improvised by civilian based separatists. In fact ‘Paris Match’ magazine did something which major news sources had failed to do. A phone number can be seen on the low loader in some photos. They dialled it ! The owner of the haulage yard told them it had been stolen ‘earlier this month’.

Talking of military and civilian low loaders leads to another confusing report which covers in detail. This is a report of a tarpaulin covered missile launcher on a military low loader filmed on a ‘dashboard camera’ a couple of kilometres inside the Russian border (Pic 3). The missile unit was originally identified as a SA-11, the type of missile most sources accept was fired at MH-17. A closer look at it by Dr Richard North noticed that not only was it on a military low loader it appeared to be longer, with a longer overhang over the hull of the launcher and (just visible under the tarpaulin) more track wheels (7 not 6). It appears to be a SA-12 a different missile launcher with a longer range and greater altitude than the SA-11. In his research Dr Richard North even found a company in New Orleans, USA, that makes diecast models of the SA-12 launcher and military low loader! Could the Russians have shot down MH-17 with a SA-12 from their side of the border and left it to ‘separatists’ with the shorter range SA-11 in the Ukraine to claim the ‘credit’ (or catch the blame !)? The SA-12 has totally different radars from the SA-11 and it is almost certain US ELINT aircraft would have detected the aircraft was being tracked by the ‘wrong radar’. (Rather than bore readers witless if you want more read the long, technical articles, on SA-11 and SA-12 on Wikipedia).

What we have after this long convoluted discussion and various attempts to muddy the waters mainly by Ukrainian and Western sources is that it appears MH-17 was shot down by a SA-11 missile fired from a separatist controlled area of the Eastern Ukraine. How did they get the launcher? Some of the pictures show a number painted on the side of the launcher ‘312’. This matches with pictures on a Facebook page relating to the soldiers in a Ukrainian air defence unit. A picture from early this year, before the outbreak of the ‘separatist uprising’, shows a launcher numbered 312 at the unit base in Donetsk. This base was stormed by the separatists at the beginning of the uprising and a lot of the equipment seized. The Ukrainians claim the missile launchers seized were ‘non-operational’ but they would say that to hide their embarrassment at a lot of high value equipment being seized wouldn’t they ? Some of the separatist commanders in various interviews (rants!) have claimed that ‘civil organisations’ in Russia gave them help fixing ‘non-operational’ equipment they seized. This could be true or it could be a ploy by the separatist leaders to make it appear they have more support than they really have to impress the local East Ukrainian population.

One final factor that is not being mentioned by the Western Press. On July 14th a Ukrainian Antonov An-26 transport was shot down over the separatist controlled region at 21000ft. The altitude of this aircraft meant that it was too high to have been shot down by a shoulder fired missile. A SA-11 or similar system was obviously deployed in the region. Three days later MH-17 was shot down. The question that is being asked is why didn’t the Ukrainian and/or US governments order international air traffic organisations to close the air zone over the Eastern Ukraine to civilian flights as a high altitude capable missile system was deployed in the area? As an aside according to the ‘Wikipedia’ entry for the SA-11M1 (the type used in the Ukraine) there was an old technology 1980’s IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) system fitted but I note that the citation for this item (citation ‘8’) is a duff link ! Has their been some ‘friendly editing’ of the entry ? How much skill does the crew need to have to use the IFF (if it exists) competently? As a matter of fact by July 17th some airlines were taking a longer route over the Black Sea to avoid this war zone. Did the Ukrainian government desperate for foreign currency keep routing flights over the area so they could charge the ‘transit fees’ to airlines? Or did the Ukrainian and/or US governments hope for an ‘own goal’ by the separatist manned missile launcher crew which the Western governments could then try to link President Putin too?

I mentioned above the Western governments tactic of blaming everything on ‘Putin’ and refusing to show any of their alleged ‘primary evidence’. The Ukrainian attempts to support the West in this have consisted of dodgy photos which they have had to take down when they are challenged. I mentioned earlier the ‘dodgy dossier’ in Iraq but in 2003 some Western media questioned the accuracy of that dossier. Even the BBC did so with it’s then reporter, the excellent Andrew Gilligan. Now we have a celebrity magazine Paris Match doing more research than the major news organisations like the BBC! A researcher working with a laptop in Wibsey, South Bradford is doing major research on the subject in between his normal ‘duties’ such as putting together anti-EU briefings. I mentioned in my previous article the work that can be done using ‘alternative media’ compared to the traditional news sources but it is strange (or deliberate ?) that the traditional media are not making efforts to improve the quality of their fact finding. They are, by their lack of efforts to research on these major issues, destroying their own credibility and handing their audiences over to the alternative media. I will close with one excellent quote. Former US Secretary of State, Dr Henry Kissinger may be 90 but he has still got all his marbles: ‘Demonizing Vladimir Putin does not make a Foreign Policy!’

Author and publisher Simon Sheppard was summarily jailed in January 2013 following an article in Heritage and Destiny.

25 January 2013. My probation officer’s hastily-arranged visit had ended just a few minutes previously, he ostensibly unaware of what was about to go down. I was in the hallway experimenting with how many boxes of TOA sheets could be loaded onto my sack trolley when about four policemen started pushing the door, which had been slightly ajar. Instinctively I tried to push it back but they pushed harder. One said “Don’t worry we’re the police.” A few moments later one of the officers confronted me, the one I was shortly to dub ‘PC Believer,’ and asked me if I was Steven W., my former co-defendant. It was his idea of a joke. When that was got out of the way I was arrested “under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 on suspicion of distributing material intending to stir up religious hatred” an offence which, unless I’m very much mistaken, doesn’t exist. Asked if I understood why I was being arrested, I said “No.”

More officers shortly arrived and began donning rubber gloves to start going through my computers and possessions. PC Believer asked me, now in handcuffs, and having great difficulty coming to terms with the situation, if I was on drugs. I was in shock. They tried to arrange my coat over my hands so the handcuffs wouldn’t be visible during the walk to the police van: “I’ve done nothing to be ashamed of” I said. After being loaded into the back I was driven to York.

Discussions at York

In an anteroom for people waiting for the custody desk was a swarthy, Eastern European gypsy woman who spoke no English. I shortly learned she’d been arrested for purse-dipping (pick-pocketing). Mindful of my caution (“Anything you say may be taken down…”) I chose my words carefully, and mentioned to PC Believer that the presence of both her and me was an interesting juxtaposition, pointing out that while I was in handcuffs she was not. He responded with some rubbish which made it evident that he was a committed adherent to political correctness. I remembered him telling the newly-arrived officers – three I think – who were about to embark on a search of my flat to “knock yourselves out.” Clearly me and PC Believer were not to be the best of buddies.

He told me that handcuffs were at the discretion of the arresting officer – him. I said that as a police officer he had a vested interest in believing that his job furthered a functional society, mentioning cognitive dissonance, but that my conclusion was that the police role nowadays is to foster a dysfunctional one. I’d recently come to the conclusion that by the enforcement of political correctness, practically everywhere the police go they make things worse.

The constables in the room, now about four, waiting with their charges, reverted to chatting among themselves. It was a long wait for the custody desk. PC Believer was evidently a keen gardener and picking up on the discussion about fertiliser, to pass the time, I related how while hitchhiking I had once been given a lift by a pair of “sheep-shit rustlers.” They had found the theme hilarious and had picked me up to share the joke. The contraband, if such it was, was in the boot of the car. The second arresting officer, who was more amiable, moved to sit opposite me and take up the conversation. He pointed out that the “sheep-shit rustlers” had probably committed no crime. There was a digression into coronial law, that apparently while a body is with a coroner it is his property. I replied that politicians have been creating so many laws to justify their existence that there is always some law which can be quoted as being broken. While living in Market Weighton I learned of a story, which I told the assembly, of a farmer who’s practice had been to drive his horse and cart to a pub a couple of miles away. There he would drink a skinful and invariably pass out. When he did his drinking friends would, by long-standing habit, carry him out to the cart and load him into the back. Then one would give the horse a healthy slap on the backside and it, well used to this routine, would walk the farmer home through the deserted country lanes. This continued for several years until “one of you lot” laid in wait for him one night and had him for being drunk in charge of a vehicle.

At this PC Believer objected to the categorisation and implicit tainting of himself which had been implied by the term “one of you lot.” I replied that it is well-established that humans sort into categories, and in any case he was wearing a uniform. “I don’t want to talk to you any more” he said. “That generally means that you’ve lost the argument” I replied. Apparently there was a serious proposal in rural Ireland recently (County Kerry to be exact) to issue licences or permits to allow driving over the limit. The argument was that the traditional Irish culture of drinking, music and story-telling was under threat. One of the officers made a remark about the damage that ensues when a family is wiped out by a drink-driver, but in this case we are talking about a short journey along rural roads at perhaps 30mph with probably the biggest danger posed by the driver being to himself.

Formally interviewed

More than an hour later at the custody desk my handcuffs were finally removed. The sergeant behind it looked around 17 (he later told me he was 30) and after that I was shown to a cell. An hour or two passed and then I was pulled out to be interviewed by two detectives. I was asked if I wanted a lawyer present: I declined, knowing that one wouldn’t be much help in this case and that everyone would have to sit around for several hours while he arrived. The interview was recorded on DVD disc – this was new, I was told it could record video if necessary. The lengthy interview consisted of questions about the Spree Killers article I’d written (and by this time had published) in Heritage & Destiny. I had learnt already that my supposed offence was connected to the local library, and my growing suspicion was confirmed that it was this article. Someone had kindly made me some copies for free, and I had given the last one to the only male employee at my local library. He, apparently, had referred it to his female superior and both she and he had made statements for the police. However absurd it seemed, the police were treating it as a potential criminal offence!

The interview was exceptional in consisting chiefly of an elaboration of evolutionary psychology and the concepts and mechanisms detailed in the Spree Killers article. It was very exhausting, because the article had truly been at the forefront of knowledge. Some additional background was added however. David Buss pointed out in one of his books that the very fact that we are here, each individual one of us, is proof of an unbroken lineage: every one of our ancestors, going back countless generations, must have successfully found a mate or else we wouldn’t be here. By the same measure, the fact that we have white skin is proof that men have fought to preserve that difference. At some time the mutation would have occurred, and if the distinct population had not defended itself it would have been wiped out or assimilated by a darker one.

Also discussed was the wide variation in genes and language in African and New Guinea tribes, and the ability of the former to identify members of their respective tribes, even though they all look similar to us. In New Guinea there are reported to be over 400 languages, even tribes living a couple of miles apart speak different languages. One account relates how two neighbouring tribes had a minor dispute, so one decided to play a trick on the other. On a certain day they exchanged their word for ‘yes’ to mean ‘no’, and the word for ‘no’ to mean ‘yes.’ Trade with their neighbours was certainly interesting for a while.

The mass suicide cult

The two officers went through the article, questioning me on various points, until we came to the part at the end about the government’s “suicidal immigration policies.” It took me a few moments to think of an example, because there are so many, but then I realised I had it from the Government’s own mouth. No less than the Chief Medical Officer had stated just a week or so previously that antibiotic resistance should be treated as a critical threat, on a par with terrorism or nuclear attack. The warning was that we could all be wiped out by a common bacterium which had acquired antibiotic resistance. What was left unstated was that the major source of antibiotic resistance, particularly tuberculosis, is India and Pakistan. There, incorrectly-stored antibiotics are sold from market stalls like Smarties. Asian schoolchildren visiting relatives, for example, bring the resistant bacteria back to Britain.

The most notable feature of the interview however was the testimonial I received at the end. One of the officers said I had “a great mind” and other things which were plainly intended to send a message to the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) to back off. This is certainly not the first time I have received sympathetic treatment from police officers – one even apologised on behalf of the State for the actions it was taking against me – but this was actually on record, obviously being spoken for the benefit of that DVD recorder. Definitely a novelty. With these and other officers I had by this time discussed episodic memory (similar to snapshot memory), neurotic transfer (spurious false confessions) and the Stockholm syndrome.

A couple of hours later I was called out of my cell again and stood before the custody desk. The teenage-looking custody sergeant told me I was being given bail until March. Then I waited in a glass-walled booth for a few minutes, and was beginning to think that, against all the odds, I might actually be going home. Shortly however I was re-arrested for recall to prison. The form stated as official reason “poor behaviour.”

Steve Whittle (left) and Simon Sheppard during their incarceration in California, before being returned to the UK to face charges under the infamous Race laws.

Police cells until Monday

Rather like the early days in the tank at California, in the bowels of a skyscraper in Los Angeles, it takes time for the shock and sense of unreality to fade. It seemed as if I would only get a few minutes’ sleep before the constant noise of the fan, or the ever-present light, would cause me to wake with a jolt, when I would realise all over again that I was back in a cell. According to the normal routine I should be shipped to the nearest reception prison, Hull, midday on Saturday. However heavy snow put paid to that, and I was told I would be held in York until Monday. At least I was given paper, a pencil and some books to read, but it would be better in a proper jail where I could make my own tea and have a smoke. That is invaluable when you’re under stress.

On Sunday however the cell door opened and I was told I was being moved to Harrogate as they were running out of cells. The officer told me it was 3 o’clock, and so disoriented was I that I assumed it was 3pm. It was actually 3am. This, a new facility, was even worse than York. I only had inferior horror books to read – as if I’d want to read those in a situation like this.

Back to jail

I ended up on the induction wing in Hull. First in a cell with a flap on the cell door and then I was moved to one without. I seemed to be constantly being asked if I wanted methadone. The first time a female officer opened the flap and posed this question I laughed, but after that it ceased to be funny. One time I woke up thinking I had fallen asleep inside a swimming baths, the acoustics around the wing being quite similar. Jail was just like before and I settled down to reading a book a day and watching the TV, which had had its settings disturbed and only had about three channels, at night. I normally don’t have a TV at all but you can’t read all the time: after a while your eyes start automatically scanning the lines without taking anything in. Fortunately one of the stations was a film channel. Most importantly, I was on my own and this compensated for a lot of things. Another novelty I saw immediately was that the expiry date on the long-life milk cartons we were given every evening was later than my release date. My licence expired on 16 April and they couldn’t hold me after that. In jail you notice these things.

I took part in a few cosy cell-huddles during association. One time the conversation turned to criminal (probably drug) matters and someone said “He looks well dodgy, he does,” meaning me. “I don’t want to know” I said and beat a hasty retreat. Later I caught up with the speaker leaning against some railings and joked with him “The accusation of dodginess is a compliment, coming from you!” because he was indeed dodgy. Another time there was someone I was told felt stress in any social interaction. This was one of those times when I put my psychologist’s hat on. I said it was not my area but thought that social empathy as a sort of ‘brain muscle’ which usually operates automatically and unconsciously.

Social empathy

This ‘brain muscle’ becomes evident when one is sick or dealing with people with mental illness. A patient in a hospital becomes rapidly exhausted by visitors, for example. Our natural tendency when transacting with another individual is to reach some midway point, to achieve some reference for further understanding. This capacity for social empathy must confer considerable survival advantage because its energy allocation has a high priority, so that in normal everyday life we hardly notice it. Only when someone is sick does that energy drain become noticeable. When talking to someone who is psychotic, one must curb the natural tendency to reach a midway point otherwise one is drawn to share the other’s psychosis. This is why attendants at mental institutions can mock and mistreat patients: they are broadening the gap between ‘us’ and ‘them’ to protect their own mental health. Reportedly mental health workers have a tendency to go senile early. Mental illness can be contagious.

So in this individual the part(s) of the brain which I call the ‘brain muscle’ may have been weak or dysfunctional, much as I have difficulty recognising faces (prosopagnosia). Then I launched into some procedural analysis, saying that the natural domain for the male is things, taking apart car engines and so forth, while the natural domain of the female is relationships. All relational activity is really sex for the female. We were interrupted before I got any further.

I’ve had various prison names: “the Professor,” “Jackanory” (because I told stories) and “Reader.” As far as stories went, their favourite seemed to be the one about the origin of the term “rule of thumb.” I would tell about the judge (it was reputedly Sir Francis Buller) who, from the bench, ruled that it was lawful for a man to beat his wife providing the stick was no wider than his thumb. This was in the days of coverture, when a husband was responsible for all the debts, and even criminal acts, of his wife.

Sociopathy and psychopathy

I think one thing of significance was learnt during this brief (5½ weeks) jail stint. In my own mind at least I have established models of the sociopath and the psychopath. A clear distinction between the two has never been obvious, according to the definitions I have seen. According to the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology, psychopathy features “superficial charm, pathological lying, egocentricity, lack of remorse and callousness.” I have met and become aware of several psychopaths, both inside and outside prison.

Probably the most dangerous type is the psychopathic politician, representative examples being Tony Blair and Nick Griffin just for starters. Because of their influence, having clear definitions is important.

My conclusion is that the sociopath exhibits superficial charm, pathological lying, lack of remorse and callousness but lacks egocentricity. All the psychopaths I have met have had a compulsion to “get one over” the other person, to always come out on top. The psychopath always has to come out better, to prevail in whatever the particular contest is. This also works in business, where the psychopathic businessman always has to feel that he has come out ahead (I think I met one such once; he was also exceptionally promiscuous). Psychopathic politicians generally use legal means, but the criminal psychopath will exploit the advantages and weigh the risks of using illegal ones.

The individual I recently shared a cell with exhibited superficial charm, pathological lying, lack of remorse and callousness but without any sign of that ruthless compulsion to prevail. The ego seemed normal or near-normal. Moreover his ploys were crudely executed, making the manipulations obvious. He was compared to a true psychopath with whom I had shared a cell in Leeds prison: that individual had lain awake at night plotting how to trick me out of more tobacco. I don’t remember him ever actually asking me for a smoke, that would have been tantamount to surrender. His manipulative ability was exceptional: it’s likely that he had manipulated the staff into putting me into his cell, solely because I had tobacco.

A sportsman has a strong will to win, and strives to do so, but he is not a psychopath. Here is an important distinction, because real, physical activity is involved: it might be running, swimming or throwing. The athlete’s own physical limitations are of account. The psychopath has only moral and legal constraints (the former being more fluid). His activities are cerebral: he is devoid of conscience and limited only by his ability to manipulate others and plot a path for himself.

The prisoner with whom I talked about ‘brain muscles’ evidently had a social disorder, but I don’t think it could be deemed sociopathic. Most of the time during association periods I leant against a radiator and read. I would try and read a part of some educational book (psychology or science) then after I’d done my daily quota, pick up a novel again.

Move to Northallerton

After 13 days at Hull I was moved. Northallerton is a small but old prison which had formerly been a Young Offenders Institution. There were two wings, a large one for Category C prisoners and a smaller one for Category D. I had been Category D at Wolds and while at Hull I had received paperwork again stating that I was Category D (which qualifies you for an open prison). Inexplicably however on my move to Northallerton I became Category C, so was located on the larger wing. I saw the Cat. D wing several times during trips to and from the prison library, and the regime there was that the cell doors were open all day, but it wasn’t as if there was anywhere to go. It was only about seven cells long and was reminiscent of a Lilliputian tower block. I found it rather claustrophobic. They made a big thing of the fact that there was a carpet on the floor.

One character I was re-acquainted with from a couple of years before had a persistent compulsion to shave his body. I doubt if anywhere was spared. I had shared with him briefly at Wolds prison but now he had a cell to himself, which was a good thing. I used to be woken at five in the morning to the sound of him scratching with a razor. I told him about the neurotic paradox, which is that regardless of how illogical or detrimental an individual knows his behaviour to be, he cannot stop himself doing it. Nowadays the fashionable term is OCD, but formerly these maladaptive behaviours were classed under the general heading of neuroses.

At Northallerton I finally managed to get hold of some toothpaste, but then came a disappointment. After mercifully spending three years inside without toothache it now struck with a vengeance. Having toothache inside and being dependent on the prison dentist is no joke. Prisoners’ teeth are often extremely poor, due to all the drugs. However the nurses’ station did me proud and soon I had clove oil and painkillers. A week or so later the dentist herself was much less impressive and I elected to struggle on with the clove oil. Both prisons gave me immunisations; at Northallerton there had been a recent measles outbreak. At Hull during one of the induction talks a man revealed incidentally that antibiotic resistant gonorrhoea was now at large in Britain – it could be controlled but not cured. This valuable warning was not delivered by a medic though, I don’t think I was aware of a single male medical worker in either of the prisons. Northallerton was more feminine than Hull, with pairs of female officers sitting together to gossip while keeping an eye on the prisoners.

Shortly after arriving at Northallerton an Imam walked into my cell, dressed in full gown and garb, asking about religious matters. He started acting on behalf of the Christian chaplaincy by inviting me to Christian services. This is the second time this has happened, a Muslim acting for the CofE in prison, there’s been some kind of directive about it. It’s also practically impossible in British jails not to eat Halal food. I got rid of him as quickly as I could and engaged the chaplain later. One had already got an earful about Holocaustianity being a post-Christian quasi-religion, and quoted Chesterton, that when people stop believing in God they don’t believe in nothing, they believe in anything. In Holocaustianity we have Auschwitz as Calvary, Hitler as the Devil and the Jews as completely innocent, sacrificial lambs. Us “racists” and “Holocaust deniers” are cast as the angels of Satan, seeking to disrupt the coming multiracial utopia. I think this end-times scenario is called a secular eschatology.

One man told me his situation “on the out” had been so grim that he deliberately set about having himself sent to prison. A catalogue of woe followed, the details of which I cannot give here since they would identify him and I was sworn to secrecy. Another set of people seemed incapable of managing money, short and in debt in whatever situation they find themselves, apparently never having been other than dependent on the State. Of course the prison currency is tobacco. The trick to getting by in prison is to see the best in people, and the truly bad individuals are a definite minority, certainly in the jails I have been in. There were a couple of ex-policemen in this jail, in for smuggling tobacco, and I had regular chats with one of them. I asked him if he would lose his pension but he said no, he’d paid into it for years so it couldn’t be taken away. An oft-made pronouncement of mine was “If our country was governed properly, 80% of these people wouldn’t be here.”

One time I was standing in the queue for food and immediately in front of me a couple of prisoners were mock-fighting. One of the dummy swings came uncomfortably close, I backed away and some remark was made about my retreat. “I’m a writer not a fighter” I said. The prison authorities were very good about forwarding mail, and the other prisoners were in awe of the messages of support I received. Some were plainly jealous of the money I was sent. I told them you have to be a political prisoner to get such treatment.

A heretic inside

Word soon got around among the prison officers and inmates that I was a “Holocaust disbeliever” and this led to some interesting debates. The prison environment lends itself to some obvious parallels and my argument ran as follows: “Imagine this is the 1940s, and we are losing a war against Russia. The Russians are invading from the north, and all the prisons up there are being evacuated southward. This wing, designed for 300, is packed with 1,500 people, six to a cell instead of two, with people sleeping on the floors in addition. Moreover, the people coming in from the north are carrying fleas, which carry typhus. The Russians have control of the air. Attempts to bring food or medicine to the prison are frustrated, because any train or lorry is being shot to pieces by aircraft. That is what happened in the closing days of the war with Germany.”

I have deliberately mixed the order and location of some of these exchanges to save possible embarrassment. One officer got a bit heated about the topic. “You can stick your beliefs up your arse! Three-and-a-half million people died!” he said angrily. I’m not normally very quick verbally, and usually only think of a suitable reply half an hour too late, but on this occasion I immediately retorted “It was six million last week!”

Many times I came up against a stock argument: “My grandfather was at Dachau/Belsen/wherever.” Then I had to patiently explain, for the umpteenth time, that even in the orthodox version of events there were no mass exterminations at the camps on German territory. It was all supposed to have happened in the East, chiefly at Auschwitz. I sometimes told of the time I visited Dachau years ago, when I was still a believer. I had sensed that something was wrong. It had been brewing even before I saw the notice tucked away in a corner, along the lines of “This shower room was never used for extermination but was constructed after the war for demonstration purposes.”

I noticed that a certain washroom-toilet always had at least one prison officer stationed outside. This apparently was for the sole purpose of stopping inmates having a sly smoke inside. When I realised what was going on I dubbed them “smoking guards” and told one that “the present regime makes the Nazis look like kindergarten teachers.” A couple of days later I was passing off the wing, and had to give my name for the movement record. “Sheppard” I said, “political prisoner.” “Jawohl” replied the officer and I walked off chuckling.

One of the prison libraries had a display about Holocaust Memorial Day. This prompted me to tell all within hearing that when the German administration at Auschwitz learned that the Russians were advancing, they offered the inmates the choice of staying and waiting for the Russian “liberators” or marching with them several hundred miles to another camp. Almost the entire camp chose to flee with the Germans and march. One of the few that didn’t was Otto Frank, because he was in the camp hospital recovering from typhus.

On my birthday, 19th February, only a couple of days after I got access to a computer, my ‘Appeal against Recall’ was faxed off. The paperwork said there were “complaints to the Police by members of the public that he had distributed written material glorifying spree killers.” I had given one copy to one male librarian, and the article had even been shown to Probation beforehand. My appeal said that on the basis of the information I had been given, I had not breached my licence conditions at all. I tried to contact my former lawyer to assist but learned later that his firm didn’t have the necessary contract. Apparently firms need special Legal Aid contracts for matters of prison law and actions against the police. So I did the right thing going ahead with it myself.

A wing at Northallerton prison

What passes for work

In the mornings I was enrolled on a pointless computer course. I was able to skip most of the word-processing (not much to learn there, I’ve been doing it for decades) but reached new heights with Powerpoint. How can anyone ever manage without it? Scores of pointless print-outs had to be made, while at the same time the content witters on about recycling and reducing waste. The atmosphere there was okay however, and I was able to sketch some notes for a future article. There were some lively discussions as well; one young man said he believed in equal opportunities and I said that it was never about equality, only superiority. I quoted the survey I did in Hull in 1997, where 80% of the unemployed were male but 69% of the people working in the unemployment benefit offices were female. Then look here I said, with a huge proportion of probation officers and other administrators being female. “Do you think then that women shouldn’t work?” I was asked. “Not while there are men on the dole” I said and continued, “Women are crooks who steal men’s jobs.” “You can’t say that!” someone said. “I just did” I replied, to howls of laughter.

It was notable how the presence of even a single member of one of the “protected groups” stifled free discussion. I was sitting beside a Pakistani one day and said to him, “Do you know that the Nazis had a Muslim division?” Of course he didn’t.

The worst part of prison is having a psychopath for a cell-mate, or sharing a cell with someone otherwise severely dysfunctional (into this category I include the large number of TV addicts, whose first action on waking is to turn it on). Fortunately I only had to endure this for a week or so. Hence the worst part, which I came to dread, was the work detail I had in the afternoons. This was billed as “Business Administration” but its primary purpose seemed to be keeping Manchester College in funds. Daily committee meetings, with minutes taken, pathetic “theory” exercises on how and why to give a presentation, mind-numbing minutae concerning health and safety and how to use a computer. The whole atmosphere stifled any initiative and ability. The obvious observation was that if this was how business at large was run it was no wonder the country was bankrupt.

A trickle of real work came though the door, but the important thing seemed to be completing the Manchester College forms. It had all the characteristics of a New Labour box-ticking scam. Prison when all is said and done is just a microcosm of wider society, although with added restrictions and exaggerations of policy. This afternoon work session came to epitomise the mediocrity of society at large. That is, a society replete with institutional incompetence, steered by people of doubtful ability, only a willingness to toe the party line. Some organisations go along with the dogma, having to adhere to the letter of the law, and of course there will be rationalisation (reducing cognitive dissonance, in orthodox terminology). The most insufferable however are those who wholeheartedly embrace this rubbish, and for whom box-ticking is a way of life.

One time there was a discussion about bullying, a poster was being produced about it and everyone was invited to sit around the table and contribute. I piped up from the far corner, “What about bullying by the state of people who refuse to go along with their dogma?” “We’re not talking about that” was the answer. A few days later my frustration boiled over to an argument with the supervisor, at one point drawing a cheer from the other prisoners. “This is all to keep people like you in fancy salaries” I said. “I wish” was her response. “Well it’s a lot more than I get” I said. The plain fact was that here we had large numbers of men working on these vapid courses, no doubt designed and marked by women, while the prison population is 94% male. We were paid about £1 per day for our contribution, and a large proportion of inmates are in prison due to being unemployed and having nothing to do except take drugs and commit crime.

Northallerton prison, where Simon Sheppard was jailed earlier this year

The last day

It all happened on 5th March. In the morning I met a police officer who told me there would be “no further action” in respect of the Spree Killers article. This was a relief, although it might have been interesting to see how it played out. How would the media spin the trial? In essence, it is the case of a writer – indubitably in this context, a journalist – being tried for an article which had already been published after complaints by two librarians!

I asked the police officer for clarification about whether I would get into trouble for posting the SK article on the Heretical site. He seemed to be aware of my appeal against recall, but said I had little chance of release before the remaining six weeks of my licence were up. In the afternoon, the normal supervisor was on “maternity leave” (this is an approximation), some men were supervising instead and I actually got some work done. During a discussion of criminal matters one young lad said something of such naivety (he’d confided some incriminating information to a lawyer) that the laughter took a while to die down.

After work came tea, then a smoke then association. About 18:30 I was leaning against a radiator as usual when an officer approached and said “Mr Sheppard?” I was thinking, ‘What trouble am I in now?’ but said that I was. “Immediate release” he said, “You’ve got five minutes to pack your stuff.” “You’re joking” I said. I suspect he was enjoying himself. No, he insisted, pack your stuff. He eventually had to come and get me while I was giving things away to my shaven-headed friend and others who had got the word.

The corridor which led off the wing seemed much busier than usual, and maybe others had gathered to watch me go. As I was passing through I recognised the one who had dubbed me “Reader” and gave him my alarm clock. I’m afraid my last words to my fellow prisoners were “If this turns out to be a joke I want it back!”

At Reception something was said about this happening only once a year. It was like being in a Hollywood film, enjoyable but thoroughly implausible. I quoted a film I had watched a couple of nights before, featuring Sharon Stone as a sharp-shooting gunslinger. As if! “Why can’t a girl be a gunfighter?” one of the officers asked, clearly another pc believer. The fact is that even the male ones are a Hollywood myth: their pistols were wildly inaccurate and I have seen a claim that bullets were very expensive at the time, making a mockery of all those trigger-happy shoot-outs. Whether this is true or not, handguns are still hopeless at distance even today, and the oft-repeated theme of shooting through ropes to free someone from the noose, hitting silver dollars in mid-air, or any of the other displays of astounding accuracy, are pure fantasy.

Then there was a walk to the gates with another officer, and we fell to talking about American prisons. I told him I much preferred British ones, and that the American justice system is cruel, quoting a case I had seen of a young black of 17 or so who had held hostage a group of college girls at gunpoint. None of the young women had been shot, raped or even hurt, but he got 50 years. “I’m not overly sympathetic to blacks who hold up college girls” I said, “but 50 years is a bit steep. We all do stupid things sometimes and anyone can make a mistake.” “They would have been in fear of their lives” he said, adopting the opposing stance. “That’s a fear crime” I replied, “it’s impossible to measure and everyone is trying to scrabble to the top of the victimhood ladder.”

Shortly we arrived at the ‘lock,’ the staggered doors which are the prison entrance and exit for vehicles. Normally all releases take place first thing in the morning; processing of departing prisoners is begun even before everyone is opened up for work movements. I was shown to a glass panel and run through a series of questions which were checked against the paperwork. Then a button was pressed, the heavy door slid aside a few feet and with a cheery wave to the officer behind the glass I stepped outside. I had a pint of bitter in a pub on the way to the train station, but it was not until I reached York and familiar territory that the realisation that I was free again finally struck home.

Librarians get writers imprisoned

Among the property returned to me was the Parole Board report though I didn’t look at it until later. It directed my immediate release but made no mention of the appeal document I had sent. This affair brings to four the number of times librarians have acted as snoops and eager agents of the police: one in Lancashire and three in Yorkshire. These incidents reveal a level of collusion between librarians and police which would put the East German Stasi to shame. What seems to be happening is that the librarians fawn over the PCSOs (a sort of new, amateur police) and the PCSOs are apparently desperate to ingratiate themselves with the full-time police. The latter seek to score points with their superiors and win politically-correct credentials. In the papers I think I can see the work of the “policewoman from Hell” I had the misfortune to meet in January 2012.

The ambivalence of librarians getting writers imprisoned quite defies comprehension. I had an interesting letter in jail from a lady who had formerly been a librarian telling me how things used to be. On reading it I remembered myself meeting that attitude of public service and serving members of the public impartially, regardless of their political perspective.

The perfect crime

It doesn’t require a lengthy jail term to know how to accomplish the perfect crime. In fact our prisons are full of failures, because successful criminals don’t get caught. (The cynic might remark that the most successful ones are in government.) It’s quite simple really. Do one, really well-planned job, then stash the proceeds as a nice nest-egg for the future. Above all, keep your trap shut and resist the temptation to flaunt your ill-gotten gains. Where most people go wrong of course is that they get greedy, do it repeatedly and sooner or later they make a mistake – usually sooner, for most of the prison population. Or they establish a pattern which eventually leads straight to their door and shortly thereafter to the back of a police van.

It strikes me now that this is what the Establishment has done. They’ve been banging away at me and others with similarly heretical views, to keep the puppet-masters happy for a while. That is, until they demand yet more repression to quell their resurgent insecurity and paranoia. And Big Sister has been getting away with it helped, in my case, by a certain judge at Leeds Crown Court. This time she may have gone too far, though most of my disgust is for the librarians, because they don’t have the excuse of being obliged to follow orders.

Not atypical of the cost of amateur crime was that committed by a man I shared a cell with in Armley, Leeds. He got five years for a £30 theft. One night, on his uppers (short of money) and the worse for drink, he demanded money from a taxi-driver. The Pakistani swore under oath that he had brandished a knife, thus it qualified as armed robbery. My cell-mate, an industrial fitter, insisted this was false, and also told me he had never been in trouble with the law before. All this depends of course on whether what he said was true, but I had no reason to doubt him. Within a few days of his arrival in jail, before he knew what was going on and how better to deal with such matters, he had his Rolex watch stolen, a more significant theft than the one which cost him his liberty.

Questions of identity

Until 16 April 2013 I must see probation officers at least weekly, one being as part of a “Healthy Identity” programme for “extremist offenders.” My reaction to this topic was that our sense of identity is an illusion. That is the current attitude, as I understand it. To have a true meta-brain would require a separate organ ‘above’ the brain, and this then involves having one above that, and so on. So evolution has taken a short-cut to avoid this complexity and provided the same benefit (survival advantage) by giving us the illusion of having a unique identity. Many visual processes have evolved using similar short-cuts, hence the large number of optical illusions.

I discussed collective identity once as I was being driven home after one of the police raids. I talked to the officers about the Stalinist raids against political dissidents, where an arrest team would pick someone up at four in the morning. My take was that with a police force in the traditional British model, consisting almost exclusively of white males, government-directed raids of a similar kind might initially take place, following orders. However after a while resistance would emerge, and the police would find some means – fudging or losing paperwork, taking sick leave and the like – to avoid executing orders they considered unfitting. If the police force were to become heterogeneous however, filled with women and ethnic minorities, they would follow such orders unquestioningly, perhaps even eagerly. A deracinated population is (simultaneously and equivalently) feminine and impressionable. It derives its identity solely from the State and mass media. A police force of this complexion would do absolutely anything the politicians wanted, regardless of traditional British values.

This is evidently the ‘long-term plan,’ though I would not claim that it is necessarily deliberate or even conscious. It is simply the logical conclusion of certain instincts being uninhibited. I am confident however that it will not come to this – other instincts will prevail, not least the Occidental respect for objective truth.

A strategic analysis

There is also the female policy of Marginal Defection to consider. In Marginal Defection, the female (the Protagonist in this game) optimally proceeds just below the threshold at which the male is provoked. This game is mentioned, but not yet named, at the foot of p. 36 of All About Women and described more fully in my forthcoming book ‘Sex & Power.’ Closely associated with Marginal Defection is supra-maximization and Going Too Far (GTF). Supra-maximization is manifest by repeated efficiency drives, being unable to tolerate incidental losses, being unable to throw anything away etc. When employed in Marginal Defection, supra-maximization is expressed by the player trying to achieve the maximum possible payoff; the temptation to do so cannot be resisted. This is one reason why in a feminine environment GTF is inevitable, and ultimately spells the demise of players employing this policy.

Today we have societal mediocrity, institutional incompetence, not only mores but our very identity being defined by an overweening mass media. If we are to analyse this in terms of game strategies, we must consider the possibility that the harmful policies now being promoted are the product not just of misguided delusion, but also of disguised malevolence. In other words, there is a population (the Protagonist) encouraging its opposite player (the Opponent) to follow detrimental policies. I call this Malign Encouragement.

An obvious adjunct to Malign Encouragement would be for the Protagonist to suppress criticism of the policies it promotes. Another adjunct would be to suppress, for example by stigmatisation, any attempt to correct the problems the Protagonist thrives on creating. My experiences are offered as contemporary expressions of these adjunct strategies, and may serve as illustration.